Quote:
Originally Posted by Yadoula8
I concede the point about perfect poker.
Although, the first paragraph explaining how its all the the same doesn't make sense.
First, I have already explained that it is all the same, only different.
Most importantly though, you back this up by saying... 'it doesn't take any more time to add or subtract from the range, than it does to create a range' ... This is what a classic mental blocks looks like. Your mind is protecting the level which you are at, as it knows, for certain, that level 3 is all poker!! That is correct, your mind is correct. Which is why it is so difficult to accept the existence of a higher level. The mind is a wonderful thing. Please don't be angry now, but, this is what I call 'clever non-sense'. Grasping on to this sort of information one of the minds defensive manoeuvres it employs while it is rejecting the reorganisation of its knowledge.
I understand that humans have natural cognitive biases and other shortcomings but I try to conciously keep my mind open to new experiences, learning opportunities, and let knowledge and ideas freely flow in. However, I don't just let anything become a permanent part of what I consider my relevant knowledgebase. Especially when no facts or logical thought processes have been presented to substantiate the claim. You're offering 'expert advice on levels' in a community full of anaylitcal players that are far better than myself who have provided insight and guidance based on statistical and mathematical analyses (not even referring to myself here. I just come here to learn and post my thoughts so that they are challenged).
Most of them probably aren't posting in the thread because they don't think it's worth their time or they feel the topic is not relevant to the discussion of poker theory. I would say the onus is on you to prove your leveling expertise or why your level technique is better opposed to the 'knowledgebased' techniques you describe as inferior (which will be hard because I think you're suffering from major Dunning Kruger effect or are just trolling). I will check out your balancing thread to see if your position or ideas are made clear in there, though I doubt they will be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yadoula8
One thing I should make clear is that, to understand the levels, as I have described, won't make you perfect at poker.
-It will remove the need to rewrite everything you know everytime you learn a new level.
I don't think this was an issue for the majority of people that learned the thought processes you've described in the thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yadoula8
-It will help you organise the masses of information that you receive training to play poker.
Honestly it seems like an extra layer of confusion that adds minimal returns to your poker game.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yadoula8
-It will serve as a template so that you could work out any play by yourself
I thought the idea was to move away from templates?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yadoula8
- it could save you years of frustration - you'd be able to enjoy the sport poker
I see no reason why your system would make this true or how you could provide evidence to back this claim.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yadoula8
Advantages of using the trusted 'lines' thought process with adjustments etc.
-Non.
I have no idea what you mean. There are absolutely strategies that are better than other strategies and should be played 100% of the time (betting/raising the nuts when last to act on the river for example).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yadoula8
It's not a different style that I'm teaching. It's the correct organisation of the thoughts in the game of poker.
I'm not sure how you can teach someone to 'correctly' organize their own thoughts. You can show them how you approach a problem, but they will organize information in a distinct way that may or may not be similar to the way in which you approach the problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yadoula8
Why would we ever need to give ourselves an actual range?
Understanding your own actual range at various points in the hand can help making decisions much easier when you are absent other information. Investing time in constructing your own range also gives you the opportunity to research how others may be constructing their ranges which gives you furthrr insight into player archetypes. If you have not conciously satdown and made a decision about what hands are actually in your range I can guarantee you you are miles behind even some microstakes players in terms of current poker knowledge (I will concede this doesn't necessarily mean you are a worse player than they are based on other skills).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yadoula8
We know our cards already. Look to the classic 'theory of poker' and you will realise that the only factor which allows poker to become a game of skill is the fact that we can't see the villains cards.
To paraphrase isn't the classic theory of poker to make villain make mistakes? I maximize the mistakes my opponent makes with perfect information about his range/hand not less information.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yadoula8
Therefore we have to give him a range, instead. Then we have to be aware that he is giving us a range. Etc etc. The only reason we would want to consider our own actual range is so that we could consider how a hand would have looked under a different set of circumstances. We could change any circumstance, the flop, for example, and it would be equally beneficial.
Understanding your own range is crucial and is perhaps one of the largest skill gaps between players. Just as an example, if I find myself in a profitable bluffing opportunity but I never have hands to value bet to make my bluffs credible, then I'm throwing money away to my opponent. I might as well give him my money. Contructing ranges away from the table would allow me to bring in the correct ratio of valuebets/bluffs to go from throwing my money away to hopefully a +EV scenario.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yadoula8
When you, justgrinding, are considering 'our actual range' you are unaware that you are actually considering the range that you give your 'game'.
Nope. I'm not talking about what my range looks like to villain. I'm talking about what I know to actually be in my range at that point in the hand.
Last edited by just_grindin; 08-29-2014 at 02:34 PM.